| Trump v. Vance | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued May 12, 2020 Decided July 9, 2020 | |
| Full case name | Donald J. Trump v. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. |
| Docket no. | 19-635 |
| Citations | 591 U.S. 786 (more) 140 S. Ct. 2412; 207 L. Ed. 2d 907; 2020 WL 3848062; 2020 U.S. LEXIS 3552. |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Holding | |
| Article II and the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution do not categorically preclude or require a heightened standard for the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting president. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Roberts, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Concurrence | Kavanaugh (in judgment), joined by Gorsuch |
| Dissent | Thomas |
| Dissent | Alito |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. VI § 2 U.S. Const. art. II | |
Trump v. Vance, 591 U.S. 786 (2020), was a landmark[1][2] US Supreme Court case arising from a subpoena issued in August 2019 by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. against Mazars, then-President Donald Trump's accounting firm, for Trump's tax records and related documents, as part of his ongoing investigation into the Stormy Daniels scandal. Trump commenced legal proceedings to prevent their release.
The Court held that Article II and the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution do not categorically preclude or require a heightened standard for the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting president.[3] The 7–2 decision was issued in July 2020, with Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissenting.[1]
- ^ a b Liptak, Adam (July 9, 2020). "Supreme Court Rules Trump Cannot Block Release of Financial Records". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 9, 2020. Retrieved July 9, 2020.
- ^ Ford, Matt (July 9, 2020). "The Supreme Court Brings the Presidency Back From a Lawless Brink". The New Republic. The New Republic. Archived from the original on July 9, 2020. Retrieved July 9, 2020.
- ^ Trump v. Vance, 591 U.S. ___ (2020)